When I was young, the Representative from our district came and visited our school. I can remember thinking how cool it was to have a politician come and visit. You see, I had been raised in a family that respected civil authorities. Luther and the other Wittenberg reformers had been very much of the opinion that the civil authorities are to be given respect as any person in any job should have respect. Concurrently, my father had been a person very much involved in politics from a young age. He had grown up reading biographies and even, from time to time, tried his hand at it. So, I was very happy to report what had happened at school. My father held his council. Good dads know when that opinions spouted to children have a nasty habit of growing up ill-formed in the child.
It has been years since then. Rob Portman has moved on to do bigger and grander things. And recently, in an article in the Dispatch, he threw his lot in with the pro-gay-marriage group. While I am for all Americans to be permitted to marry, I have found this groups tactics to be questionable. Obviously emotions move people quicker than logic; but we have to ask what the fall-out from this whole enterprise will be?
First, let me clear up my view on homosexuality. My religious stance should not matter, but nor should it be discounted. I believe, like the rest of orthodox Christianity, that homosexuality is a sin. That is to say it creates disunity with God and God's creation. If you do not believe in God or do not hold to the Christian view of creation, that is your prerogative. I also believe in grace. I believe grace is far more convicting than the law. If we were to ban homosexual marriages, how many other things would we have to ban? Would we ban lying? Covetousness? Adultery? How about taking the Lord's name in vain? In addition, we would have to render null and void all the marriages outside the Christian faith. Legalism doesn't work. God knows this. That is why he sent his son. Of course the law hasn't been done away with; but neither are we saved by it. We enter into discipleship under the shadow of the cross and the darkened empty tomb, not legalistic precepts.
Sadly this is a battle that is being fought by legalistic pharisees on both extremes. Both see the laws of nature being the paramount of human salvation or at least justification; rather than seeing a life relationally transformed through grace by faith. I do not have faith in my biology. Eventually telomeres will stop splitting and my heart will run down. My body, mind, and soul seek my ruin. Whatever. That's life.
Rather, Christians should seek to make sure no one is persecuted because of their beliefs. I have always thought of homosexuals as having a different worldview than the Christian. That person has a different telos and has seen fit to bind himself or herself to different codes than the Christian. To me a homosexual deserves the same tolerance and respect as a Buddhist, Atheist, Jew, Muslim, or countless other worldview participant. Christianity was not born in a Christian nation, it was born in a foreign land. It was born in the land of its sojourn. As such we must be accepting to others who do not share our views. Perhaps they will become Christian in the end, but that is not ours to determine. That is a work of the Spirit. We are only His humble servants.
Which brings me back to Rob Portman and other charlatans. Perhaps a tragedy as great as the denial of civil rights to homosexuals (for instance not being able to receive pay upon the death of a partner or visitation rights at a hospital), has been the rise of the gay-rights' charlatans. They range from corporations looking for an easy cause to gain consumers to politicians looking for votes to religious organizations who see a way to maintain their standing in a changing country. Would these groups actually back the homosexual movement if it were not in vogue? I doubt it. Corporations would keep their lips tightly sealed, while the politicians and religious leaders would practice the age-old technique of doublespeak.
And so we come to the most recent of members to the "homosexual-rights" bandwagon, the Republicans. It has been amazing that after this election cycle how many Republicans have become advocates. I found it interesting to read. Granted the Libertarians had always been in favor of it. I suppose that was wind in the perfect storm, but the other fact was that the religious vote just doesn't mean anything. The younger evangelicals could care less about Caesar and his elections, but those who do still care are going to vote Republican anyway so what does it matter what the party thinks?
And Portman, always the adaptable political player, has metamorphosed once again into a person who accepts homosexuality. While some may come out praising his "courage" for, not becoming an ally, but just affirming that homosexuals should be allowed to marry in civil unions (something it should be noted that even the members who have broken off of mainline protestant churches affirm); we must look at the history of this politician.
I know this is going to touch a sensitive nerve here, but I actually am offended by this editorial. He states that his Christian religion led him to his harsh stance, but the love of his son led him to a changed mind (what the Greeks would call metanoia). The blessing should come as no surprise to anyone familiar with the heresies of Conservative Evangelicals. He became reconciled to family and nation; and what was the sacrifice legalistic Christianity.
Rob, I give up legalistic Christianity daily. Its what Luther calls daily repentance and renewal. Its called understanding that your country and your own heart are sometimes out to make your life hell. I started this process in high school after reading Bonhoeffer's ethics. I didn't need a son coming out to me to show me that legalism isn't the heart of the gospel. I knew it because of Christ's death on the cross. I knew it because I wrestle daily with urges of pride and envy and greed and dishonesty and, most importantly, idolatry.
I am glad Mr. Portman has decided that homosexuals should be allowed to be recognized as equal under the law of government. I am just angered by his reasoning. I am angered that he didn't understand his alleged faith enough to see that it allows for people with whom one disagrees to be given the same rights under the law. I am angered that he used his son as the reason instead of his faith.
However, I am most angered by the charlatans like Mr. Portman who jump on the bandwagon of protecting a group of persecuted people for their own gain. I wonder how many non-Christians will assume that the debate that went on inside Mr. Portman's soul was a debate between the real Christianity and the love of family or human rights. Like all charlatans, Mr. Portman tries to square the circle by saying he is for churches who disagree with homosexuality. He wants to have his cake and eat it too; and in our day and age of over-simplified media sound bites, I imagine he will get his wish. The gay-rights' groups will trumpet his support as yet another sign of the march of progress; and for services rendered Mr. Portman will become a little more palatable to changing demographics in this country. And in the end only two groups will have lost, orthodox Christians who believe in the dignity of human beings made in the image of God but ultimately flawed and sinful, and the homosexuals who will have found themselves used once again to further some person's campaign. Meanwhile the corporations, the activists, the politicians, Christendom's lapdogs, and talking-heads will have moved forward in the name of progress but under the influence of their own self-importance.
But here is the hopeful part. When the parade is gone and all the sycophants don't need to suck-up to anyone anymore; we Christians will still be behind ... like we always have been. And maybe after the hoopla and intoxicating rhetoric, we will be able to speak openly of our sins to a world in need of a savior who, it just so happens, is waiting after the grandstanding is over, to be introduced to just one more person in need. It has been repeated so often that we forget the meaning, "that God so loved the world that he sent his only begotten son, so that whoever believes in him may not parish but have eternal life." Luther called that the Gospel in the nutshell; and its nice to know that after all the writing and rewriting of principles, and the minting and reminting of new paradigms; the Gospel still remains true and unalterable. I am a sinner exactly like you, but thankfully that is exactly who God came to save.
No comments:
Post a Comment